SARK9

Here are some more reducer pictures of some I make for my own machines....mostly, the main thing I find convenient is to have that telescoping mount for aiding the belt tension issues you can have when matching 2 belt lengths. Also, as many have noticed, you need to have the reducer pulley axle's centerline a bit behind your machine's hinge pivot point.....otherwise you can't tilt the head back normally without loosening the belt. I use an adapter plate to move the motor's mount point back and slightly to the right of the original holes to offset for the extra thickness of the pulley. I attach the plate using the existing holes in the table. Works very well. -DC One of the other multipliers as mounted: -DC

That screw on my slightly oddball Mitsubishi has a major diameter of 4.2mm. Don't have a Pfaff to compare. -DC

Yeah, treadle is something I'd like to check out more seriously. I keep waiting to find an old 31-15 treadle powerstand I can "upgrade" on CL for giveaway prices....around here, even the very occasional rusted-out Singer 29-4 is assumed to be made of solid silver or something, to the extent that I just ordered a new Consew 29B out of sheer frustration. -DC

I have had two clutch motors that I came pretty close to leaving installed, since I was THAT CLOSE to really having useful control of the start/stop/velocity. One was almost new, the other was an antique external clutch model. There is much that is hidden! I still found my pea-brain is too easily unbalanced by the constant droning noise they all make, and the silence of my brushless servo motors is more conducive to a relaxing immersion in the creative. Oh, and my sewing area is on the second floor, and the damned clutch motors are HEAVY! -DC

I am still a mere white belt in iconoclast-fu, but gratified to see a score called out. The send-up of the 19th century's darling clutch motor (and its cadre of extremist feathering savants) is meant to be humorous when seen from a particular perspective..... that of the more general newish sewing population, who, finding their balky/grabby temperamental speed demon to be absolutely hopeless for detailed work, extinguish all charitable thinking on the subject. This, in turn, may lead to an amplified perception of insufferable smugness when confronting those who prominently wear the feathering-campaign-award-ribbons a bit too proudly in public. Sorry. Yes, we all have at least one clutch motor. I have several piled up on a dusty pallet. If you are not a sailmaker or such, the sole reason I can see to *prefer* one in a non-production/industrial setting is: You already have it. Woot. I suppose, in retrospect, its a good thing I didn't publish a CARTOON with a likeness of one. -DC

<satire>In spite of the ardent passion some feel for the "clutch motor", it will never, ever replace the tried-and-true *line shaft* for reliably powering the machines of the true artisan. Who would forego the reassuring whisper of the master smith's stout waterwheel, and the regular slap-slap-slap of the overhead leather belts? The "clutch" itself is a dodge created for the lightly practised worker, as real journeymen have no need of such trivialities; these clutches are for people who STOP sewing! We can only feel a certain remorse for those lacking in the skills needed to efficiently organize their workday, who with red-faced shame, find they NEED a clutch. The wise practitioner will realize that these buzzing, diabolical new devices, with their overly indulgent "clutch", can never be made to last as long as true river power, and we must look askance at the fainting dilettantes who lobby for their substitution.</satire> -DC

>>While tailor works, shouldn't the masculine of seamstress a seamster?<< I've been referring to myself by that handle for quite a while....It sort of evolved from finding that the word *sewer* has a rather unfortunate spelling.... -DC

Eric- Yeah, no way could I ID that machine! Its really pretty sad to see any of these guys go down hard like that. If I took my checkbook inside that building, I'd probably join them in bankruptcy. -DC

One of the pictures I have time to check, the one which has the link "ryan86" looks like a Singer 211G**6 walking foot model with reverse...it would be good for 3/8" total thickness with at least T135 thread. The one labelled "ryan93" is probably a Singer 107 zig-zag machine for fabric. Ryan83 shows several walking foot type machines from the back view (which you can't easily identify)....3 of them appear to also be Singer 211's of unknown version, the nearest in the foreground is a specialized machine for some proprietary or custom op. The Consew on ryan97&100 are double needles..ryan96 is a bar tacker....there are quite a few useful machines shown, but several specialized ones as well. -DC

The add-on pneumatic stuff is actually pretty useful...my Pfaff 481 and one of my Jukis both had small air cylinders for the foot lift and the reverse linkages. Its no big thing to convert these functions to manual/pedal actuators and have the best of both worlds...these nice hands-free capabilities plus a silent controllable servo motor that only runs when the pedal is pressed. Unless you are confident you can successfully program the current factory system, and will need and use the programmable stitch routines regularly, I would discard the existing motor (as many do with a loud or grabby clutch motor) and keep any accessories that were either pneumatic or used single phase relays or switches. A good number of small 3/4 hp servo motors are available for about the same cost as a VFD or phase converter. I personally don't care if I have to buy a new Chinese "servo" every couple of years if they keep me from having to listen to the annoying buzzing and humming of a clutch motor. However, I have had 5 servos running for several years now with no issues at all, to date. But each to their own. -DC

I've dug around through a good number of older factory industrials in the former textile belts of NC, and while there are lots of "plain" 110v clutch motor equipped machines, the ones set up for balls-to-the-walls production with all the automated stuff seem to usually be 3ph. Two of the machines I bought had similar setups on them, pneumatic lifts, all sorts of needle coolers/positioners and powered and programmable remote accessories...one was a Mitsubishi Limi-stop Z, both were wired for low voltage 3ph. Guess that's why I sort of assumed it was not a single phase. I also see people get sort of skunked by buying an industrial without asking if its single or 3ph before they get it home. Its a common gotcha. -DC

http://www.marincopowerproducts.com/en/3015p Who knew? Since most industrials from factories use 3ph..... -DC

The plug on your power cord certainly *looks* like its for 3ph... -DC

When in need, I watch Craigslist for a homely example of a table that has the cutout ready for my target machine....you can often find a sound, straight but *ugly* top, complete with a K-leg stand (and even a used machine!) for close to the cost of your material list. I have bought damaged full sheets of Formica HPL for $8 to $25 from the local builder's supply, which can cover as many as 4 standard sized tables, depending. A "laminate trimmer" router bit, some bondo if needed, flooring sandpaper, and a bit of contact cement puts you in business. I don't expect to see it on the cover of any magazines, however. -DC

It seems very similar in outwards profile to the Consew 101 and a couple of others, and it looks like an offshoot (or a loose copy) of the Singer 241 stuff....I will *guess* its not a needle feed, just bottom feed only. A "walking foot", as far as I know, will probably have to be an "even feed" type of semi-functional foot made for a high-shank domestic type machine...I'd start looking for one made for an old straight-stitch-only Kenmore (not a zig zag model, so the "foot" portion will be mostly over your narrow feed dogs). If by some chance there is an equivalent made for industrial machines, I'm sure someone here will have heard of it. You may want to try a standard teflon high shank foot, or a roller style foot to see if it is a better solution. The good news is, I think those types of machines have LOADS of standard parts that interchange, in terms of the feet/needle plates/feed dogs and it should all be pretty inexpensive since they are so common. Keep in mind its always going to be a garment machine designed for light materials. -DC

Since you are also open to a *used* machine, don't overlook the Japanese-made offerings such as the older Consew 206RB* as well. There are several makes and models of "classic" walking foot machines in this general class, by Singer, Seiko, Brother, Mitsubishi, Juki, Nakajima and others, as well as excellent first class machines from Pfaff, Durkop/Adler etc. All will serve well for anything under 3/8" of Cordura and webbing, and generally handle thread sizes from T45 to T135, with many able to handle T210. Expect to pay more for the less commonly available accessories for the German machines.....the most bang for the buck is found with machines that share some comparability with the Singer 111w family. A good example of any of these machines, treated with respect, will last a generation. My Chinese-made 206RB-5 has been problem-free to date, and seems quite mannerly. I would personally lean towards the new Juki if my budget allowed. -DC

All brush-type motors eventually wear out the brushes or load up/groove the commutator. If the little spark-and-ozone generator has seen a lot of service, its something to look at. Frequently you can simply adjust the brushes in for a bit more tension and get more use out of them. They shouldn't be expensive if they need replacing. -DC

Something you can try (since you won't be needing the old belt) is: Cut the old belt. Wrap it as tightly as you can in the grooves of both pulleys, then mark the point where the belt's end laps. Measure to that mark. Ask for that belt size. -DC

I would suggest that there is an enormous body of experience that discourages the use of either WD-40 or 3-in-1 oil in sewing machines, guns, fishing reels....anything which will be sensitive to gummy or hygroscopic shellac deposits over time. There is nothing easier to get than ordinary sewing machine *white* oil. Avoid any gimmick oil that is suspended in a volatile carrier, as the carrier evaporates over time and leaves lord-knows-what behind. Any machines with ball or roller bearings should not use an oil with moly additives. -DC

I have a 20U33, a gold painted one, still made in Japan, which I bought in like-new condition. I don't think I've had occasion to sew with T-90 thread on it as yet...I almost exclusively use T-70, with a number 18 needle. The way mine behaves, I am a bit dubious about your prospects with folded-over belt loops in jeans material. This is a plain single needle bottom-feed-only machine, and is pretty fussy about the initial feeding of material just under the leading edge of the hinged presser foot. To use the ZZ function for a bar tack, you'll have to install the ZZ needle plate, feed dogs and presser foot, which pretty much will make an issue with visibility on something as narrow as a belt loop. I mostly use mine for hemming 2 to 4 layers of 1000D Cordura fabric, which it does well pretty well, but even using the T-70 thread, its a bit snarky about tensioning the upper thread consistently. You may find them a little hit-or-miss if asked to punch through really hard layers of folded fabric, since the design of this machine is essentially a slightly more robust version of the domestic type home machine, with the same "stop motion washer" bobbin winding release on the handwheel, which *will slip* if asked to get too serious. I'd consider it quite a gamble for your application, though mine may just be an oddball. I suppose you could take some samples of your item with you and see if the seller can demo it? Take several to set up with. -DC

Nice work! And I see what you mean about the Adler hammertone! That is probably the most exaggerated effect I've seen, for sure. -DC

Nice find! The pulley grooves seem to be for round leather belts, as one might expect. -DC

Its pretty much the same machine as the consew 225 or the LU-562 you were looking at. Less foot lift than the Singer 111-155, shorter max stitch, small bobbin, no reverse. This is a helpful site for getting a rough ID on many of the Singer models. http://ismacs.net/singer_sewing_machine_company/model-list/classes-1-99.html -DC

I went just the opposite- Mine had the synch plate as standard, but none of the binder parts/accessories. It has the typical Singer 111 style walking foot presser feet, and a nice (for my projects) aggressive serrated feed dog, which moves things right along. I actually wanted the smooth "plain" arm cover, since I am using it inside of bags/pouches at angles it will just barely make....so I made one today. We weren't doing any light gold hammertone powdercoat on my shift, so I went with the textured white. I am keeping a couple of the aluminium covers blanked out for whenever we run a more interesting color. -DC

On my Mitsubishi CU-865, which seems to have a copy of the 335 arm, the main difference in the synch cover and the stationary cover seems to be whether there is a hole for the part numbered 339 (on my attachment), which is driven by the motion of 338, or whether this hole is actually a stop milled slot which does not penetrate the plate (milled on the on underside only) with clearance for 338 to move freely without engaging plate 316. -DC